Ditching DRM on all e-books. Could Apple do it again?

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by bhartman36

Is there a smartphone, tablet, or desktop that Kindle software doesn't run on? Hell, they even have a Web reader. They can safely ignore other e-ink formats, because they've got software for almost any device imaginable.

Yes, but their books don't work on e-readers created by other manufacturers.

You're correct that Amazon has an app available for about any platform. They don't care on what device you read, as long as you not only read an Amazon book, but also read it on an Amazon device, or in an Amazon app.

And that is something I don't want to do. Nowadays, with hyperconnectivity for any device, even the ones that don't need it, I am very mistrusting of huge corporations, be they Microsoft, Apple, Google, or Amazon.

[bhartman36]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Yes, but their books don't work on e-readers created by other manufacturers.

That's absolutely true. Like I said, they have no incentive to encourage people to use some other company's kiosk. It almost certainly has less to do with the information uploaded than it has to do with not giving you a reason to look at other e-book vendors for e-books.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by bhartman36

I usually buy whole albums, too, but we're a dying breed.

You quoted the post to which this comment applies, but you inadvertently set the quote to be from Andrew H. It isn't; that post was mine.

Maybe you'd want to change that to prevent confusion

And yes; I have some albums underway right now. Long live the Amazon.co.uk marketplace. (Why is it 3 times cheaper to ship from there to the Netherlands, compared to the Amazon.de marketplace, I wonder?)

[bhartman36]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

You quoted the post to which this comment applies, but you inadvertently set the quote to be from Andrew H. It isn't; that post was mine.

Maybe you'd want to change that to prevent confusion

Fixed it. Sorry for the misattribution.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by bhartman36

But there were other outfits using DRM-free MP3s for years before iTunes. And Amazon was the first to sell DRM-free music from all major labels. At the time they did this, Apple was still selling DRM'd music.

This is true. But it is true because the publishers were concerned about Apple's power and so permitted Amazon to sell DRM'd music and did not permit Apple to do the same thing. It's not the case of Amazon deciding it was going to sell DRM'd music and Apple deciding it would rather not. And Apple was only permitted to sell DRM'd music if it abandoned its 99c-only pricing model and charged $1.29 for more popular music.

But AAC isn't the standard (as in mainstream, not technical standard) that MP3 is. You can't necessarily take your AAC files and use them on another device as easily.

No, it isn't as popular as mp3s, although it is fairly widespread. But it is a standard that anyone can use, and it was adopted because it had better sound quality at lower bitrates. I.e., music recorded at 128kbps in AAC sounded better than music recorded at the same bitrate in mp3. (This seemed significant at the time when the iPod only had 5G of space; but small hard drives ended up dropping so much in price (4-5 years later, iPods had 120-160 G of space) that people ripped mp3s at higher bitrates where the difference between it and mp3s was much less.)

Apple decided to use aac in 2001; it's not like there were really any other stores out there. And of course any store can sell music in aac format; it's not proprietary to Apple. And iTunes has a function to convert aac to mp3, which is trivial in any case.

And being tied to software puts limitations on functionality if you're using a non-iDevice. Back a few years ago, when Palm still existed, there was a major kerfluffle because Palm engineered the Palm Pre to be able to sync to iTunes, and Apple cried foul.

This is true, although it didn't prevent you from putting music from iTunes on the Palm Pre.

If I can put a book I bought from iTunes on any device, why in the world would I want to pay iPad mini or iPad prices to read an e-book?

I don't think that's the right question. The right question is why in the world would you buy a book in iTunes if you didn't already have an iPad? I don't think *anyone* buys an iBook who doesn't already have an iPad.

I don't think that anyone would pay iPad mini prices just to read an e-book, nor do I think that many people buy iPads (even iPad minis) primarily for that reason. They aren't really marketed as e-book readers, and of course they do a lot more. (I'm also skeptical that many people who did buy the mini as a book reader would use iBooks over Kindle or another e-pub format.)

Because of course you can read any format on the iPad with the right app, just as with any other tablet. I don't read much on my large iPad, but all of my Amazon books are there, waiting.

I don't think e-books are a major draw for the 9" iPad (although I do know people who read on one), but the iPad mini is a different story. The iPad mini is more closely designed to compete with e-readers such as the Kindle, Kindle Fire, and Nook. In fact, the major draw of the iPad mini is the reading form factor, as far as I can tell. For almost anything else, you're better off with a full-sized iPad, since the price difference isn't gigantic.

I think the major draw is just compactness, generally; I think this is true of other non-bookseller branded tablets like the nexus as well. If you read non-book focused tech sites, people never talk about reading on their tablet. It's always about apps and video.

The difference is that Amazon has software for almost every platform: PC, Mac, iOS, Android, Windows 8, etc. Amazon literally doesn't care what hardware you read on, as long as you're reading an Amazon book.

Yes, this is true, and very smart on Amazon's part. Amazon is also primarily in the bookselling business and doesn't make much money on its devices.

I think DRM-free e-books would have the biggest impact on Amazon's hardware division. If non-Kindle users could buy any e-book from Amazon, I think the e-Ink reader market would become a lot more diverse than it currently is. That would be an interesting thing to see.

I would like for Amazon to have DRM-free books, but I think it would lead to less diversity in the e-book hardware market. Companies that sell books and make devices (such as Amazon and B&N; I don't know about Kobo) are able to charge a low price for their devices because they are subsidized by their e-books. If more people are buying from Amazon - and fewer from B&N (or whoever), B&N (or whoever) will be less able to match Amazon's device prices.

Agreed. I think the publishers are crapping themselves in fear at the thought. When you look at what's happened to the music industry since DRM-free music, it's enough to give one pause. Of course, there's a major difference between the two: The music industry has singles. Books don't (generally) work that way, so you don't have an analogous situation to the music industry, where a consumer can buy one song and leave the album on the virtual shelf. (It should be noted, though, that that's not an impossible model for the publishers to adapt, in some cases. I sell individual stories out of my anthology, and major publishers could decide to break up their anthologies that way, if they thought it would make them money.)

[Sweetpea]

Here, the removal of nasty DRM has started some time ago already. And without the need of Apple. It is being replaced by watermarked DRM.

I don't think that apple will be able to do anything on the DRM front as there are simply too many devices out there that cannot connect to that apple stuff.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

If that were true, then Amazon would be selling EPUB, which is compatible to much more e-readers than MOBI/AZW nowadays.

Yes, Amazon makes money selling e-books, but they want you to read them on Kindle only, or in one of their apps, not on someone else's reader, and not in someone else's app. The reason probably is that the Kindle uploads information to Amazon, while other readers and apps would upload information to their manufacturer. (It's also the reason why my e-reader is permanently disconnected from Wifi.)

I always figured that the biggest reason that Amazon had to not sell EPUB is so that they don't have to pay the Adobe tax. If all books go DRM free, the Adobe tax would go away, and Amazon may start offering EPUB if the author requests it. I think what Amazon does is wholly dependent on their strategy. Do they want to be the top e-book seller, or the top e-reader seller? I think that if they offered authors the ability to sell EPUB versions of their book, they may get more authors to go exclusive with them.

Shari

[Katsunami]

They want to be the top e-book seller of course.

You only sell an e-reader once. Books, you sell over and over and over again. Someone who reads 52 books a year, at an average price of $4, will spend over $200 on books. People who don't have a Kindle because they may want to have choice of shops, would maybe spend a part or even all of that $200 at Amazon, if they'd sell and support EPUBs.

People going for the Kindle because of the Amazon shopping experience and support will undoubtedly shop at least partly at Amazon for books, whatever format they support.

[DiapDealer]

If Apple were successful/integral in pressuring publishers to dump DRM completely, I'd give them two thumbs-up for it (and continue to judge all their other efforts/decisions on a piece-meal basis).

[volwrath]

So under this utopian idea, would overdrive keep drm?

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by volwrath

So under this utopian idea, would overdrive keep drm?

They'd have to for books requiring time limits. They already have a lot of DRM free titles both as eBooks and Audiobooks.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

They'd have to for books requiring time limits.

And they'd surely try to up the DRM licensing fee. When the government is your only (or almost only) customer, raising the price makes sense.

It's true that Adobe couldn't raise it to hundreds of dollars, for then libraries would stop buying mainstream big publisher (and university publisher -- they also DRM) eBooks. But the fee could easily go from the current fraction of a dollar to several dollars.

If book DRM does go away, an anti-library move is a more likely motive than wanting to please people on this board

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

But the fee could easily go from the current fraction of a dollar to several dollars.

It could I suppose. Going from the current fee, IIRC it's $0.08 Adobe tax for a temporary license as opposed to $0.22 for one for a purchased book, to several dollars could go a long way to killing things. On the other hand a lot of libraries seem to be paying the huge increased prices some publishers have gone to so who knows. DRM-free books technically do have time limits too, but it's on the honor system that a borrower will delete the book after the checkout period.

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

If book DRM does go away, an anti-library move is a more likely motive than wanting to please people on this board

If that happened: I would still support my libraries, but I would oppose ebook lending and be much more cautious about my (admittedly limited) ebook purchases. While I recognize the need of everyone from the author to the publisher to the reseller to earn a living, I have a somewhat dim view of excessive greed. Limited greed is okay, since I understand why people want to do better than average. Excessive greed is not okay, because I cannot understand why some people feel that they deserve so much more than others that they make the lives of others significantly worse.

[cstross]

Originally Posted by Crash500

I would think it would be more likely that Amazon would push for DRM free first. They have readers on multiple devices where Apple would prefer to lock everybody into their platform.

DRM, let us remember, is required (or not) by the publishers -- specifically the big five. Many of whom are headed by old folks who are not comfortable with this new-fangled technology, and who are deeply wary of doing anything that might impact shareholder value -- notably the spectre of piracy.

DRM helps Amazon, by locking non-tech-savvy consumers into their walled garden (the Kindle platform). I see no obvious commercial motive for Amazon to want to make it easier for customers to transcode the books they've bought, with the risk that they'll move to a rival platform.

Apple are a minority platform (less than 20% of the market). They've less at stake if publishers drop DRM than Amazon. Nevertheless, they've got little incentive to push for DRM to go.

However the smarter publishers are very wary of Amazon, and they're beginning to eye up the trade-off between DRM (reduces piracy, they think) and walled gardens (gives Amazon a stick to beat them with). Macmillan dropped DRM on some imprints last year -- notably Tor -- and their one year report is that piracy has not suddenly shot up. This message has not gone un-noticed. (Macmillan were able to do this because they're the English-language arm of Holtzbrinck, who are a family firm. The buck at Macmillan doesn't stop at a committee table, it stops with John Sargent. And if John wants backing, he phones Fritz, and Fritz von Holtzbrinck, who owns the company, gets to give a straight up/down order. Ergo, they have rather less bureaucracy than their larger rivals, and are able to move faster on policy issues like DRM.)

Upshot: as and when the elderly boardroom seat-warmers retire, a younger generation of executives who are less scared by new technology will probably choose to drop DRM, purely as a defensive measure against Amazon's near-monopoly.